Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T04:27:18.128Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

The Date of Livius Andronicus

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  11 February 2009

Harold B. Mattingly
Harold B. Mattingly
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham
Get accessRights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

There can be no doubt of the primacy of Andronicus in Roman literature, but there is an interesting and unorthodox ancient tradition concerning his date. Modern scholars incline to place Andronicus' birth about 285 B.C. and to postulate either that he came to Rome as a slave from Tarentum in 272 B.C., or that the story of his captivity is a fiction. His first play was produced in 240 B.C.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Classical Quarterly , Volume 7 , Issue 3-4 , July 1957, pp. 159 - 163
Copyright
Copyright © The Classical Association 1957

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

1 Warmington, E. H., Remains of Old Latin, ii, pp. viii–xiv;Google ScholarBeare, W., Roman Stage 2, pp. 16–17;Google ScholarDuckworth, G. E., The Nature of Roman Comedy, p. 40.Google Scholar

2 See works cited; also Beare in C.Q. xxxiv(1940), 12.Google Scholar In support of Accius Niese, ‘Zur Geschichte des Pyrrischen Krieges’, Hermes xxxi. 504.Google Scholar

3 Cicero, I.e. 73: ‘In quo tantus error Accii fuit ut his consulibus (197 B.C.) xl annos natus Ennius fuerit; cui quum aequa- lis fuerit Livius…’

4 Cicero (De Senectute 4. 11) has Salinator at Tarentum: Polybius calls praefectus C. Livius (8. 27. 7 etc.); Livy M. Livius Macatus, cognatus Salinatoris (27. 34. 7). Tutor: Jerome (ad ann. 1830) says ‘T. Livius … qui ob ingenii meritum a Livio Salinatore cuius liberos erudiebat libertate donatus est’.

5 Broughton, , Magistrates, i. 236;Google Scholar P.-W. xviii, ‘Livius’, 892–3.

6 Hymn: Livy 27. 37. Collegium: Festus s.v. scribae, 492, 22.

1 The balance ‘postquam eum fabulam docuisse (240 B.C.) et Atticus scribit’ and ‘docuisse autem fabulam’ (197 B.C.; Accius) suggests that Cicero (Brutus, I.c.) thought that Accius meant the first play. This strengthens his argumentum ad absurdum. Livy's variant date for Ludi Iuventatis (36. 36) makes things worse—191 B.C.! Perhaps it was meant to deal Accius the coup de grâce ? Cicero refutes Accius by orthodox chronology (Plautus, Ennius, Naevius); Beare, C.Q. xxxiv. 11 sees the way out—did Accius accept (a) Livius’ primacy or (b) orthodox dates for the other poets ?

2 For Accius see Warmington, , op. cit. xix–xxi; P.-W. i. 142 f.Google Scholar (father was freedman of colonist, not colonist himself). Accius' status: Pliny, N.H. 39. 19 (proud bearing towards noble poet, Caesar Strabo).

3 Pisaurum: Livy 32. 44. Fundus Accianus near Pisaurum: Jerome ad ann. 1878 (poet himself a colonist!). Ennius: given civitas by Q. Fulvius Nobilior as iiivir col. ded. (Cicero, , Brutus xx. 79).Google Scholar

4 Livii: P.-W. xiii, ‘Livius’ 12–13, pp. 854–5; Gagé, J., ‘La Balance de Kairos et l'épeé de Brennos’, Rev. Arch. 1954, pp. 163–4.Google Scholar Iuno Regina: C.I.L. i2. 370(?), 371 (I. Lucina), 378, cf. 372 and 79 (Mater Matuta).

5 Yet Beare (C.Q. xxxiv. 11, 14;Google ScholarRoman Stage, p. 17) talks of discovery of old records!

6 Suetonius (De Gramm. 2) dates first Roman grammarians c. 150 B.C., after visit of Crates of Mallus; Lampadio (P.-W. xvii. 1850), one of first, published Naevius’ Bel-lum Punicum. Varro quotes commentarii of Cornelius (De L. L. 5. 148–50) and Vergilius (ibid. 7. 39) on Naevius (plays).

1 C.Q. xxxiv. 13;Google ScholarRoman Stage 2, p. 17.

2 Philip V in his letter to Larissa stresses Rome's grant of civitas through manumission—the normal way then: S.I.G.3 543. Ennius is perhaps first certain grant for virtus other than military; but his case cannot be safely used to argue for Andronicus c. 250 B.C. As freedman Andronicus could surely have kept his Tarentine name as cognomen (pace Beare C.Q., p. 16).

3 Beare, (C.Q., p. 12)Google Scholar and Warmington, (op. cit. p. xiii)Google Scholar think that Andronicus survived till c. 204 B.C., the end of Cato's adulescentia. But Cicero's phrase— ‘qui quum sex annis ante quam ego natus sum fabulam docuisset… usque ad adulescentiam meam processit aetate’—suggests that survival to the first years of Cato's youth is intended. Cato was adulescens any time from 218 B.C. The idea that Andronicus was alive in 207 B.C. rests, as shown above, on a misreading of Livy. Beare, (C.Q., p. 12)Google Scholar translates ‘as Livius had done in the memory of the previous generation’ (31. 12), without seeing that it can't apply to 207 B.C.!

4 P.-W. iA, ‘Ludi Saeculares’, cc. 1700–5; Censorinus, De Die Natali, 17. 8 and 10–11 (Valerii figure prominently in series, and in one ‘origin’ of Secular cult; see P.–W., I.c.).

1 C.I.L. vi. 32323. 119 ff.;Google Scholaribid. 32329 (Severan Games). Maidens' choir: Livy 27. 37 (Iuno Regina), commentarii of third day of Games, and Horace, Carmen Saeculare (Diana).

2 M. Lepidus, consul 187 B.C., vowed and dedicated a temple to Iuno Regina ‘in circo Flaminio’ (Livy 40. 52). A. Q,. Lepidus was XVvir in 17 B.C. and is named immediately after Agrippa at the head of the college—followed by Potitus Messala, a Valerius! C.I.L. vi. 32323. 150.

3 Beare very ingeniously undermines the story of the captivity (C.Q., p. 12), but does not finally dispose of the phrase in Brutus, 18.72 ‘Accius autem a Q. Maximo quintum consule captum Tarenti scripsit Livium’, which reads as though neither origin nor capture was doubted. Cicero questions neither.

4 ‘Nos sumus Romani qui fuimus ante Rudini’; Cicero, De Oratore, 3. 42. 168, quotes it without Ennius’ name, but Warmington (I.c., p. 435, n. d) is surely right in suggesting that it comes from the Annals or Ambracia. Ennius probably told the whole story himself, for after all it redounded to his patron Nobilior's credit (see p. 160, n. 3).

5 Cicero’s argument against Accius (Brutus 18. 73) has force only if this chronology is sound; ‘in quo tantus error Accii fuit ut his consulibus (187 B.C.) xl annos natus Ennius fuerit: cui quum aequalis fuerit Livius, minor fuit aliquanto is, qui primus fabulam dedit, quam ii qui multas docuerunt ante hos consules, et Plautus et Naevius’. Beare justly says (CQ., p. 10): ‘We do not know whether Accius himself shared the belief that Andronicus had been the first Latin dramatist—a belief which seems to have been generally held and which is nowhere assailed in extant literature. (If he did, then obviously he must have believed that the other dramatists lived even nearer his own time.)’ Understandably Beare has not gone farther and inquired whether, if Accius did believe this, he had good reasons. Yet I believe this is logically necessary and that Accius' authority, rated highly by Beare also (ibid.), justifies adventurous rethinking about Naevius and Plautus.